I just quickly read the majority opinion. Its very easy to read and the logic is inescapable. Alito crushed the foolish arguments made by Chicago. Sometimes you have to pity an attorney forced to make ludicrous arguments in defense of an indefensible position.

Alito never came out with a specific level of scrutiny to apply, but he did go on at length about how this right is just like all the others, that there is no basis for treating it differently and so on. He made it clear the right is an important right to this day. I think it will have to be strict scrutiny.

He also pointed out that Heller allowed for certain restrictions. I wonder if the old maxim “the inclusion of one is the exclusion of the other” will apply here, limiting the permissible restrictions to those listed in Heller. That would sure be nice!

Overall, a great day for liberty. Congrats to Gura! We all owe him a beer.

One concern I have is that on remand, the lower court will set a very low standard of evaluation, and there will be another appeal and SCOTUS will finally have to issue a ruling on level of scrutiny. That will take a few more years. We'll see. I hope I am wrong, but I would think that some circuit will do that at some point.

Again shows that the Left's mindset is not effected by facts or anything else. They will find some inane arguement as long as it SOUNDS plausable to get what they want.

I believe that the 4 KNOW that the 5 are right but they don't care. It doesn't fit what they want, what they believe is best so they will say anything to fight it.

With 5 Left justices they will overturn this and they will overturn Heller. They would rewrite history and erase the Second. They FEAR it that much.

The Left in Chicago like DC will fight this every step. They know they are wrong but they fear the Second so much they will lie and spend millions to delay until they can overturn these.

Yes, we won this battle. If the foe was honorable we could rest but since he has proved time and again through his lies that he is dishonorable we must continue to be watchfull and work to overcome his next lie and delay.

Well IL, NY and NJ are part fo the US, so I would think so. I need to re-read Heller but I believe Scalia said bearing means carry and its part of the right. McDonald today reaffirmed the right is fundamental and goes on about how its just like any other right.

I think Scalia said open carry is a right in Heller. So I would think they have to let you open carry now. I would not want to be the test case ;-) And like I said, I need to re-read Heller but I think the answer to your question is yes.

Boy talk about "spinning" the decision! Here's what the Brady Campaign says about it:

"“We are pleased that the Court reaffirmed its language in District of Columbia v. Heller that the Second Amendment individual right to possess guns in the home for self-defense does not prevent our elected representatives from enacting common-sense gun laws to protect our communities from gun violence. We are reassured that the Court has rejected, once again, the gun lobby argument that its ‘any gun, for anybody, anywhere’ agenda is protected by the Constitution. The Court again recognized that the Second Amendment allows for reasonable restrictions on firearms, including who can have them and under what conditions, where they can be taken, and what types of firearms are available. "

"Will this decision eventually have any practical effect on the right to carry in IL, NY, NJ?"

Eventually, yes. Directly, no. The right to keep and bear arms is now fully applicable to the states. In order to establish the right to carry, there needs to be a case in which the right to bear arms is at issue. The right to bear arms is not directly at issue in McDonald. There already are pending cases (e.g., Sykes v Sacramento) intended to establish whether the right to bear arms includes the right to openly carry arms in non-sensitive places.

Will be a real interesting watching this unfold. Firearms cannot be banned? What about a State like Iowa that makes no provision for civilian ownership of machine guns?? While allowed under federal law they are banned by some states. Will that law go away??? What about the part of the of the National Firearms Act that prohibits the registration of any new machine guns after 1986??